believe that they do), Hartnett has noted that some of the
data can fit “a static universe with a simple Euclidean nonexpanding space just as well as … the standard concordance
BB model”.
23

General relativity

General relativity predicts that the universe is expanding.
Whether this is interpreted as other galaxies moving away
from us at tremendous speeds or whether space itself
is expanding, general relativity asserts “that these two
equivalent viewpoints … are equally valid”. General
relativity also allows for the possibility that space itself
may be expanding faster than the speed of light: according
to physicist Max Tegmark, “while nothing is allowed to
move faster than light through space, … space itself is free
to stretch however fast it wants to”.
24

The supernovae data and the cosmological constant

In recent decades, cosmologists have considered
type 1a supernovae explosions as a form of calibrated
‘standard candles’ used as yardsticks for measuring
distances.
25 Celebrated efforts by two research teams in
1998 resulted in measurements of dozens of supernovae in
numerous galaxies. Figure 3 shows a photo of a 1994 type
1a supernova. According to secular cosmologists, these
measurements from type 1a supernovae (SN1a) indicate
that the universe is expanding and that the expansion rate
may be accelerating.
26

Hartnett himself stated in 2011: “The type 1a supernova
(SN) measurements are the very best evidence for an
expanding universe [emphasis in original].” At the same
time, he also examines the many assumptions that are
built into the interpretation of that evidence.
27 For secular
cosmologists, however, the supernovae measurements
confirmed an extremely tiny but positive cosmological
constant, known as Lambda (Λ), at a stunning measurement
of 10–120 power smaller than what was estimated from
theory—a knife-edge so fine as to defy comprehension.
Conflict between theory and observation concerning
this value has produced a deep crisis within physics and
cosmology today. It is difficult to over-estimate the depth of
this crisis, which hit the physics and cosmology communities
like a ‘proverbial ton of bricks’, according to well-known
Jewish atheist physicist Leonard Susskind. Susskind
acknowledged: “No missing mathematical logic is going
to explain that.”
28 Alluding to William Paley’s famous
watch analogy, self-proclaimed atheist and NASA scientist
Carlos I. Calle has referred to this apparent extreme fine-tuning measurement of the cosmological constant as the “the
biggest watch of all”.
29 Physics writer Brian Greene admitted
that when he first heard of the supernovae measurements,
his first reaction was: “It just can’t be.”
30

This crisis in cosmology has been so extensive that
it has helped propel multiverse theory as the only way
out for many secular cosmologists, since they cannot
believe that a designer designed this universe with such
apparent fine-tuning.
31 In other words, their own theory and
observation have led them to this cosmological dead-end
(from their perspective). This has then led to the ridiculous
notion that there are near-endless trillions upon trillions of
universes, or that ‘all possible universes exist’ and that we
just happen to find ourselves in ‘one that contains life’ (the
so-called anthropic principle). Dissenting Jewish atheist
philosopher Thomas Nagel, whose critique of the standard
neo-Darwinian materialist worldview in his book, Mind &
Cosmos, has upset so many of his colleagues, rightly calls
this notion of the multiverse a ‘cop-out’.
32

Thus, the supernovae data present a huge problem for
secular cosmologists. Further, these SN1as “can equally
be telling us that the presumptuous assumption of the
Cosmological Principle is not a certain doctrine upon which
to build one’s worldview”.
33 The Cosmological Principle
assumes that there is ‘no unique centre, and no edge’ in
our universe. This is a separate issue from the question of
expansion, but it shows how much impact the supernovae
data have had.

Since the rest of the scientific world today assumes
that the universe is expanding, we can and should use this
conundrum of secular cosmology in our apologetics. We
can do so without embracing big bang cosmology with all
of its presuppositions. We can point out to non-believers
that present-day ‘science’ has reached a complete dead-end
on this issue and is thoroughly confused, making up ‘fudge
factors’ to try to get out of this dilemma, while at the same
time showing that, if the universe is indeed expanding at
present, Scripture pointed to that fact long ago. This can
serve as a powerful witness to our world today.